Ways to negotiate the reduced interchange

Been thinking about how coaches may work things with the interchange changing. Most teams have their edge backrowers playing 80 minutes but use their lock basically in the front row rotation. So the obvious move would be to go back to the smaller, fitter 80 minute lock and maintain the usual front row interchange.

So that got me thinking about our roster and who is suited to what and how we can maintain our size even with our backrow playing 80 mins.

I came up with what I think is an idea to give our backrowers rests during games without interchanging them. For example, u start with Sue at lock, Lawrence on the left and Siro on the right. The workload of Siro and Lawrence is much less than Sue in the middle, so once Sue begins to feel the pinch he moves to the right edge (where he has proven himself) and his workload will drop, bring Siro in tight where he will take on more work for a short period. I also think this will make it harder on teams to program their defence against us with the 3 backrowers moving around, all the while we should have a fresher back 3 then the opposition.

This at least allows us to play the 3 backrowers for the first 40. We may be able to bring on Chee cham or Halatau in the 2nd half using just one interchange for the backrow in the game. Will also allow 2 interchanges for hooker if Cherrington needs it and 5 interchanges for the front row. Or maybe 4 for front row leaving one up your sleeve.

So I think backrow versatility is the key.

Anyone else got ideas on how to manipulate the reduction?

We will go something like

8. Aaron Woods
9. Manaia Cherrington
10. Martin Taupau
11. Chris Lawrence
12. Dene Halatau
13. Curtis Sironen

All back rowers can play a full game

I think that’s about right. It will of course depend on what the plan is with Farah. If he doesn’t play maybe Halatau plays a long stretch starting in the back row, playing hooker and then subbing off for Cherrington’s last stretch. If only Farah plays then that frees up some slots for a back row swap. If Farah and Cherrington play then that’s 6 interchanges if you assume both props get interchanged. So either you roll the dice on the final 20 or get creative. Long term few teams are going to be able to have hookers not playing the full 80 unless a back rower can cover things or they have a lot of forward playing 80.

Big fan but Farah won’t be with WT next year.

I believe Lawrence, Siro, Sue can play the full 80 minutes along with Cherrington at hooker.
You would then rotate two props on the bench.

@TYGA:

Big fan but Farah won’t be with WT next year.

I believe Lawrence, Siro, Sue can play the full 80 minutes along with Cherrington at hooker.
You would then rotate two props on the bench.

So where is Farah going

Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0

@TYGA:

Big fan but Farah won’t be with WT next year.

You better tell him then. He appears to be under the misconception that he will be.

Mail is WT will pay him in full to leave no strings attached.
I would take it as he will attract $500k+ if he goes O/S in addition to the payout. For the record we are dumb.

@TYGA:

Mail is WT will pay him in full to leave no strings attached.
I would take it as he will attract $500k+ if he goes O/S in addition to the payout. For the record we are dumb.

Onya Harry

Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0

The key is not having 2 interchanges allowed for the hooker. Next season I think we will see a lot of teams carrying 1 utility on the bench probably just as injury cover

Recent Topics

Support our community by clicking here and joining our Forum Support Scheme